Yanda restructures deal

**wickedsolo** · 05-10-2012, 09:18 AM

http://blogs.baltimoreravens.com/201...ns-salary-cap/

Reduces his cap hit by nearly $3 mill.

**moose10101** · 05-10-2012, 09:35 AM

And allowed the Ravens to sign Jones.

**mmi16** · 05-10-2012, 09:59 AM

I get so sick and tired of these 'restructure' stories that come out of the 'Cap era' of the NFL. All the hoopla of a player signing a 'contract' that once it is signed doesn't have the security of the paper it is printed on.... especially the multi-year deals of 5 - 7 - 10 years and the like.

Personally, I'd rather the NFL set the maximum term of a contract at 2 years and guarantee the full value of the contract and get rid of all the 'financial smoke, mirrors, sleight of hand and ledgerdomain' that exist with the salary cap.

**Corey** · 05-10-2012, 10:02 AM

Naw that would create way to much roster turnover. Every year half your roster would be up for free agency.

Anyway, unless Yanda gets hurt this is probably money well spent.

**Benny8444** · 05-10-2012, 10:14 AM

I like this move assuming it is the only restructure. I dont want to be like PIT where they are in trouble every year because of doing things like this and cannot sign players and always have to cut players. I feel we have enough depth now and dont need to make any more moves other than signing Rce or Flacco. My guess rice first to clear up space than Flacco.

**Boulderraven** · 05-10-2012, 10:26 AM

I guess this is one of the 10-12 ways Bisciotti said that Moriarty had in getting under the cap. A 3 million restructure over the length of Yanda's contract won't effect the much at all.

**TheJoeFlaccoShow** · 05-10-2012, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by Boulderraven

I guess this is one of the 10-12 ways Bisciotti said that Moriarty had in getting under the cap. A 3 million restructure over the length of Yanda's contract won't effect the much at all.

He has 3 years left after 2012 so this adds a million to each year, no big deal.

**JettRavensSuperPup** · 05-10-2012, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by mmi16

I get so sick and tired of these 'restructure' stories that come out of the 'Cap era' of the NFL. All the hoopla of a player signing a 'contract' that once it is signed doesn't have the security of the paper it is printed on.... especially the multi-year deals of 5 - 7 - 10 years and the like.

Personally, I'd rather the NFL set the maximum term of a contract at 2 years and guarantee the full value of the contract and get rid of all the 'financial smoke, mirrors, sleight of hand and ledgerdomain' that exist with the salary cap.

Im good with the system as long as our cap guys are smarter than your cap guys...and our guys are very good at what they do.
The system is so much better than what they use in baseball

**Captain Offense** · 05-10-2012, 11:54 AM

Anybody who knows about this stuff knows that the length of the contract and the yearly numbers are all smoke and mirrors anyway. The only numbers that matter are the guaranteed ones and this year's money. An agent loves it when he can say that he got a 110 million dollar contract for his client. It would not be so eye-popping to say the client got a 30 million dollar signing bonus and $ 500,000 for 2012. And if you keep a cap system, that two year contract uses 15 million per for the signing bonus plus the salary. If you only pay attention to the real numbers, then you convert every story about a contract into a different number. If you sign an older player to a three year deal with a 6 million dollar bonus, with the third year salary of absurd numbers, everybody knows it is a two year deal and this year the 1/3 cap hit on the bonus helps. By the time you cut the player, the cap should be higher and you may have other contracts that help take the hit for the last 1/3 that is accelerated. But the agent still gets to use all of the numbers for his portfolio.

Under this system, a five year contract is not a five year contract.

**LukeDaniel** · 05-10-2012, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by mmi16

I get so sick and tired of these 'restructure' stories that come out of the 'Cap era' of the NFL. All the hoopla of a player signing a 'contract' that once it is signed doesn't have the security of the paper it is printed on.... especially the multi-year deals of 5 - 7 - 10 years and the like.

Personally, I'd rather the NFL set the maximum term of a contract at 2 years and guarantee the full value of the contract and get rid of all the 'financial smoke, mirrors, sleight of hand and ledgerdomain' that exist with the salary cap.

Really?

I don't know where to start in response to this post.

You realize that the ability to restructure contracts allows the top-end franchises to keep more of their own players, right?

You realize that the ability to restructure allows the top-end franchises to sign more free agents from other teams, right?

You realize that the ability to restructure allows the top-end franchises to better compete with the perpetual bottom feeders in the free agent market, right? Without restructures, teams like Detroit and Tampa Bay and Carolina and Cleveland (who always seem to have oodles of cap space every year because they have such crappy players) would be able to monopolize the free agent market.

You realize that restructures allow more room for good drafting teams to find creative ways to retain more of those draft picks, right?

Are you really a Ravens fan? You assassination of restructures seems out of line and quite perplexing. One of the reason why the Ravens are an elite NFL franchise right now is directly due to the ability of their shrew front office to navigate the salary cap rules better than their opposition every year.

Why you would want to remove that advantage is puzzling. Replacing the current structure with mandatory 2 year contracts is outright stupidity. No party would be happy. The Players Union would be outraged. Coaching staffs would have a harder time with more turnover. Fans would never get the chance to build their love for players like it is now. Owners and management wouldn't be able to market their players as well.

It's one of the worst suggestions I've ever seen here...

**ballhawk** · 05-10-2012, 01:43 PM

I wish they would restructure ed reed. Add a couple years to his deal and save a few mil from his cap hit this year.

**Iscull** · 05-10-2012, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by ballhawk

I wish they would restructure ed reed. Add a couple years to his deal and save a few mil from his cap hit this year.

If that rumor for Osi is true, I could see it happening.

**BcRaven** · 05-10-2012, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by ballhawk

I wish they would restructure ed reed. Add a couple years to his deal and save a few mil from his cap hit this year.

Why? As great a player as he has been, and I do agree he's a HOF Safety, why extend him now when his contract is up at the end of 2012? IMO best scenario is the Ravens win the Super Bowl, and Ed Reed retires. All good things must come to an end... Bc

**Benny8444** · 05-10-2012, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by BcRaven

Why? As great a player as he has been, and I do agree he's a HOF Safety, why extend him now when his contract is up at the end of 2012? IMO best scenario is the Ravens win the Super Bowl, and Ed Reed retires. All good things must come to an end... Bc

That would be the best case scenario, then he and ray retire. but extend him now like they did ray to a cap friendly deal where they can cut him if they want or when he retires there is no cap it. If the Osi deal happens, then i see this happening as well as Rice signing.

**Benny8444** · 05-10-2012, 06:15 PM

What people dont understand about restructuring contracts is that teams that do it often are in cap trouble every year and have to cut players at times who can still play and also stops them from signing other teams FAs. When was the last time the Steelers signed another teams FA? they probably wont be able to afford wallace next year unless they cut harrison and restructure troy p. They will probably also have to cut Hampton soon too. I dont want to see the ravens cutting players every year and never being able to sign other teams FAs because of always borrowing against the future.

**Benny8444** · 05-10-2012, 06:17 PM

If you restructure to many contracts it will add up at one point and a team will have to impload the roster to be under the cap.

**Ravenswintitle** · 05-10-2012, 06:17 PM

As flaky as Ed Reed is (I'm retiring, I want a new contract, etc.) I don't see them adding years. He may come in next week and say he's decided to coach high school football...

**wickedsolo** · 05-10-2012, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle

As flaky as Ed Reed is (I'm retiring, I want a new contract, etc.) I don't see them adding years. He may come in next week and say he's decided to coach high school football...

Word.

Restructuring Ed Reed could also wind up hurting the cap more in the long run and giving him more money than what he's really worth. I love Ed Reed and want him to retire a Raven, but he's lucky the Ravens haven't asked him to take a paycut because 35 year old safeties don't normally get paid like he will this year.

**ballhawk** · 05-10-2012, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

Word.

Restructuring Ed Reed could also wind up hurting the cap more in the long run and giving him more money than what he's really worth. I love Ed Reed and want him to retire a Raven, but he's lucky the Ravens haven't asked him to take a paycut because 35 year old safeties don't normally get paid like he will this year.

If they extend him a couple years, his base salary fo this year goes down significantly. I dont yhink his asking price would be too high. If ed reed isnt playing for the ravens next year, he will be playing for someone else. By all indications, and by that i mean everything that ed reed himself has said, he plans to play another 2-3 years. The could get a cap friendly deal done.

**Corey** · 05-10-2012, 07:42 PM

Ed wants to be paid. He's not going to take less money for the better of the team. All his whining about it over the last few years makes that clear. He wants market value for a top safety.